TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Supreme Court affirms classification of product as adhesives under Central Excise Tariff Act</h1> The Supreme Court upheld the decision of the Customs, Excise and Gold (Control) Appellate Tribunal (CEGAT) that the product should be classified as ... Central Excise – Glue and Adhesives - Classification - Held that:- by virtue of Section Note (2) of Section VI and Section Note (1) of Section VII of Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985, the product would be correctly classifiable under T.I. No. 35.06. If a good is sold in two sets consisting of two or more separate constituents, some or all of which fail in Sections VI or VII and the goods are intended to be mixed together to obtain a product falling under Sections VI or VII, then that product has to be classified in the appropriate heading of that products. In this case, admittedly the goods are sold in two sets one set being a polyurethanes resins and the other set being polyisocyanate. The polyurethane resin falls under T.I. No. 3909.60. When the above products are mixed together they become adhesives which is a product falling in T.I. No. 35.06. Therefore, as per these notes it has to be classified as adhesives - Decided against Revenue. Issues:1. Correct classification of the product under the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985.2. Invocation of the extended period under Section 11A for show cause notices issued by the Department.Analysis:1. The Supreme Court heard an appeal against the Judgment of the Customs, Excise and Gold (Control) Appellate Tribunal (CEGAT) regarding the classification of a product by the Respondent, who manufactures adhesives based on plastics. The Respondent initially classified the product under T.I. No. 35.06 and received approval. However, when exporting products in 1992, they classified the items separately, leading the Department to issue show cause notices claiming the correct classification should be under T.I. No. 3909.60. The Commissioner held in 1996 that the product was classifiable under T.I. No. 3909.60, but the CEGAT allowed the Respondent's appeal, determining that the product should be classified under T.I. No. 35.06.2. The key issue in one of the show cause notices dated 4th August, 1993, was whether the extended period under Section 11A could be invoked for the period July, 1988 to April, 1992. The Supreme Court analyzed the classification based on Section Note (2) of Section VI and Section Note (1) of Section VII of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. The Court found that if goods are sold in two sets with separate constituents intended to be mixed together to form a product falling under specific sections, the final product must be classified accordingly. In this case, the sets sold by the Respondent contained polyurethane resin and polyisocyanate, which, when mixed, formed adhesives falling under T.I. No. 35.06. Therefore, the Court upheld the CEGAT's decision that the product should be classified as adhesives under T.I. No. 35.06.In conclusion, the Supreme Court dismissed the appeals, stating that the product should be classified as adhesives under T.I. No. 35.06 based on the provisions of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. The Court found no reason to interfere with the CEGAT's judgment and ordered no costs to be paid.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
